Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Authorial Intent


Is the meaning of a poem determined by the author's intention?


I've been considering this question recently, especially in light of recent class discussions Paul Laurence Dunbar and Wimsatt and Beardsley. For me, the poem's meaning has always been something that the reader aspires to uncover, the author's intention buried in words and phrases to be deciphered by a willing reader. Consider this - if you were enamored with a certain poem to the point where you felt that the author articulated every emotion you've ever felt about what it means to be in love, and then after awhile you discovered the poem was written about a dog, would the poem lose its significance for you? Certainly Wimsatt, Beardsley, and Eliot would argue that the signficance of the poem doesn't change, for the intention of the author is irrevelant in the meaning.


And yet, I'm not entirely convinced of their argument. While I feel as though I probably should rely less on the author's intention when determining the meaning of a poem, at the same time, I recognize that not only do I focus on authorial intent when reading poetry, I put a lot of meaning into the poems that I have written. I'm sure that Wimsatt and Beardsley would frown upon my writing, but for me, the act of writing poetry has much less to do with tradition and much more to do with expressing something within me.


This, however, isn't to say that I must know the meaning behind a poem. In some ways, I suppose that I'm happier being ignorant of the meaning and interpreting the poem to apply to my own life. In an earlier blog, I discussed the disconnect I felt after learning that Paul Laurence Dunbar authored the poem "We Wear the Mask." Similarly, certain poems (and songs) have been ruined for me when I learned of the intentions of the author.


In some ways, I suppose I want to lean more toward the ideas of Formalism, yet on habit alone I find it hard not to be swayed by authorial intent. It seems to me that while there is something important about an author's intentions in determining the meaning of the poem, at the same time, we shouldn't let that be the only tool we use when deciphering the meaning, or significance, of a poem.

1 comment:

mpmthoughtsonlitcrit said...

Re: Certainly Wimsatt, Beardsley, and Eliot would argue that the signficance of the poem doesn't change, for the intention of the author is irrevelant in the meaning.

I don't necessarily think they are saying that the poem's significance has not changed rather I think what they are saying is that the poet has not done his or her job- according to Wimsatt and Beardsley we shouldn't have to ask the poet what his or her poem means we should be able to tell if it is written properly- furthermore, I agree with you that knowing the poet's intention in writing a poem should only ever so slightly change that which we thought the poem to mean- I like to think that poems have the ability to speak to us at an individual level